DISCLAIMER: THE POSTING OF STORIES, COMMENTARIES, REPORTS, DOCUMENTS AND LINKS (EMBEDDED OR OTHERWISE) ON THIS SITE DOES NOT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, IMPLIED OR OTHERWISE, NECESSARILY EXPRESS OR SUGGEST ENDORSEMENT OR SUPPORT OF ANY OF SUCH POSTED MATERIAL OR PARTS THEREIN.

Pages

Thursday, 10 October 2013

School Shooting in Jersey Exclusive. (Update).

A little short of a month ago VFC
published another Blogger (Jersey’s only independent media) exclusive.

We brought you the story from the mother
of a child who was allegedly shot in the face by a teacher at his school using
a Starting Pistol indoors at a five a side football match.

The teacher was fined £1,000 in the
Magistrates Court after pleading guilty to discharging an imitation firearm
although it is still a mystery as to why the teacher was not charged with
assault, Actual Bodily Harm.

VFC is horrified, and appalled, to learn
that after a so-called “internal” investigation, at the Education Department,
the teacher is now back teaching at the school.

What kind of a message does this send
out to parents, and the wider world? In our original reporting of this TRAGIC CASE a number of questions were asked and still remain unanswered, not
least this; “what really has changed in child protection since the Haut de la
Garenne/Savile cover-up? How much safer are our children now and how better
represented are they when up against a States Department?”

It would appear that no lessons have
been learnt since the Haut de la Garenne/Savile cover-up and the Education
Department STILL won’t take child protection issues seriously.

It is inconceivable to believe a teacher
can discharge an imitation firearm, at
an indoor five a side football match, which causes a child to be taken to
the hospital’s Accident and Emergency Department, be found guilty of the
offence in the Magistrates Court and still keep his job.

Who conducted this “internal”
investigation? What was its Terms Of Reference? Why wasn’t it an external and independent investigation?
Considering all the alleged failings in this case has ANYBODY been held to
account and if not why not?

We must remember that the “incident”
occurred in the second lesson of the day yet the mother wasn’t informed of it
until the child came home from school and told her himself. Why was the
headmaster not told about the incident until the mother told him when she found
out? Why didn’t the school take the child to A&E? How are parents supposed
to have confidence that their child is safe at school when this sort of
behavior (apparent worthless “internal” investigations) is still happening in light of
the Haute de la Garenne/Savile atrocities/cover-ups?

Why isn’t the State Media reporting on
this or asking any questions? Who IS asking questions besides Bloggers
(Jersey’s only independent media)?

Despite Jersey being at the centre of a
major Child abuse cover-up, and attempting to raise its profile on the
international/world stage as an open transparent and trustworthy jurisdiction,
it is clear that NO lessons have been learnt and child protection issues remain
as they always have……….non existent and so-called “investigations” are still
conducted “in-house” with no outside scrutiny.

Speaking of scrutiny why is the
Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel so quiet on this issue? Who in Jersey
will stand up, speak out, for its children if they won't?

If you believe child protection is taken
any more seriously now than it was pre- Savile/HDLG you might want to think
again?

“Its not up to you to decide whether this teacher is given his job back”

All’s the pity because he wouldn’t have been allowed within a hundred miles of a school if the decision were mine.

What right do I have to judge? I have children and worry about their safety at the hands of the Jersey administration and as any concerned parent the welfare/safety of my, and all children, is a priority.

For which the student according to the paper did not want him charged.I really think this harassment of people by blogs such as yours has to stop because this incident has been dealt with so it is time for the School, the teacher and the student to move on.

The very attitude that enabled Savile/HDLG displayed in all its glory. Nothing to see here so let’s move on.

So, from the main posting;

“Who conducted this “internal” investigation? What was its Terms Of Reference? Why wasn’t it an external and independent investigation? Considering all the alleged failings in this case has ANYBODY been held to account and if not why not?”

I know of an incident locally involving two children who's father kept a loaded pistol under his pillow, and according to the children on several occasions held the loaded pistol to their heads while they were in bed, the authorities were informed nothing was done about him, and he ended up getting a job as a school caretaker,

'...a PE teacher at Le Rocquier School, was taking a PE lesson in the gym when he discharged the imitation gun, the Magistrate’sCourt was told. Although the pistol was aimed away from the pupils, one boy suffered minor injuries in the incident.'Don't let the facts (deliberately shot in the face?) get in the way of a typically hate-filled, truth-starved and agenda-driven piece of "citizen journalist" blog nonsense. If you people were not vaguely amusing, you would be mildly dangerous...

The comment at 15:37 is alarming. Is this the Jersey problem you so often talk about VFC.

"...a PE teacher at Le Rocquier School, was taking a PE lesson in the gym when he discharged the imitation gun, the Magistrate’sCourt was told. Although the pistol was aimed away from the pupils, one boy suffered minor injuries in the incident.'

The Magistrate's Court was told.. Who is the quote from. The defence or prosecution if you get my drift..

What action have the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny panel taken on this shocking incident? Let us not forget how it was coverd up in the begining. I would find it strange if they haven't started an urgent investigation into this horrific shooting.

Full credit for not naming the teacher and upholding a professional standard otherwise you would have tha apologists accusing to of a witch hunt and ignoring the gross failings which are still taking place with child protection issues.

"What plausible reason could there be for having a starter pistol at a 5 a-side football game indoors!?"

And there lies the problem. The teacher, one would imagine, has undergone a psychiatric assessment before being allowed back into teaching. The nature of the incident is totally unacceptable. This incident has exposed the children, the cover up nature of the staff, the handling of the entire incident by the school and not least the abject failure of Education and it's Scrutiny Panel. I don't think people have grasped the magnitude of what really happened here.

ABINGDON, Va. — A teacher at William H. Neff Center, a career and technical school, was charged with 12 felony counts of brandishing a firearm on school property after he allegedly lined students up against a classroom wall and fired a starter pistol at them, execution-style.

Manuael Earnest Dillow reportedly lined the students up near a garage door in the school’s welding shop, ABC News reports. He then pulled a starter pistol from the waistband of his pants that looked like a real gun, according to police.

It might interest you to know, that at time of publication, and despite the small amount of coverage the State Media gave the original story none of the State Media contacted the mother, I did and this is the balance.

Ah, you are asking for voluntary false equivalence from VFC. If an independent journalist facilitates evidence-based discussion of the geologic surface of the moon, does he owe it to you to give equal time to a silly opinion about green cheese? No. He doesn't. And there is no more reality-based evidence in your views than in the myth the moon is just green cheese.

Must have missed it. Has the State Media reported that the teacher is back at school, how (and who by) the decision was made to allow the teacher back to school? Has it reported what input the mother and child had to the “internal” investigation, what its Terms of Reference were, how many witnesses were interviewed, who they were? Please send a link to the article?